-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Owen said:
The idea is just how Finland could have historically be divided between outside powers. It was possible for "finnish lappland" to end up with danish swedish and russian hands. actually it was administration wise part of Sweden until peace of 1809 when it became first time part of Finland. The province presents the Lappland which was populated by same nomads
The province (Viborg/South Karelia/Karelian Isthmus) added by the Gulf of Finland models how the land was actually ruled. Historically that part of land was contested many times between west and east. First in 1300s when it became part of Sweden in 1323. Next time it changed hands when it became russian in 1721. (and a bit more russian in 1743). The province presents land that can be ruled from the castle of Viborg.
...but Greenland has two provinces? How does that make sence?Flame of Udûn said:because it was hardly populated at all during the EU period?
And there's A LOT of provinces that was hardly populated in the EU period.. The entire Siberia, Hudson Bay area, many other places.
Greenland will most likely be merged to one... Exactly how much would it add to gameplay to make Iceland 4 provinces? I think your Norway has too many as welldeallus said:
Good!Flame of Udûn said:
I'm not saying that Iceland should be four provinces, but it should be two.
Why is that? If Sweden should have 13 or 14 provinces I think Norway should have at least 8. The regions in my suggestion have quite distinct differences, both historically, geographically and demographically. Troms and Finnmark COULD be merged to Hålogaland (Finnmark is a bad name for the entire province), and Møre COULD be merged with Nidaros (that would make it 8 provinces).
deallus said:
I disagree. 1 is enough.
And exactly why does Sweden and Norway need this many provinces? On what basis?
Because Scandinavia is a significant geographical part of Europe, with rich history and culture. But you go ahead and leave us out AGAIN. We're quite used to it up here.Hive said:
I was just suggesting, didn't expect to get any good response.. But the outline of Norway has really got to improve, it looks like SHIT now..
Some issues:
- Lofoten (the "hook" in the present province Narvik) is a chain of islands, not a little thing sticking out to sea. it's about three or four times the current size.
- Norway has some of the longest fjords in the world, NONE of those are included (except a little piece of the Hardangerfjord)
- The border to modern day Finland and Sweden doesn't look anything like this. A bit odd, since the borders were mostly cut out in the late medieval age. Especially bad is Finnmark.
deallus said:
Oh dear, here we go again
I'll burst your bubble before Hive does: "We don't care as long as there ain't gameplay issues"
deallus said:
Oh is "The Man" keeping you poor Scandinavians down? How I feel for you...
Oh, and I'm Scandinavian myself for the record.
Lots of places does. It's a game map, not a satelite image of the world.
Paradox have done stuff like this in order to avoid all sorts of small and completely unimportant details damaging gameplay. You see this simplification everywhere, not just in Norway. As examples, I can mention the Balkans, Greece, Scotland, etc.
And this hampers gameplay in what way?
I actually felt it was pretty accurate... in which ways is it wrong? Not that it matters much though, since modern day maps are completely irrelevant to EU2...
Now I'm sorry about my bitter replies, but I'm already getting pretty tired of these biased and/or nationalistic suggestions/demands for new maps...
Eldin said:Oh dear, here we go again
Indeed. This is getting rather sad...
Exactly!
Hive said:Now I'm sorry about my bitter replies, but I'm already getting pretty tired of these biased and/or nationalistic suggestions/demands for new maps...
I know you started this thread, and I like to respect the thread, but may I suggest that you dont continue to look at all suggestions as if they were directed only for you.
I think deallus first suggestion was intresting. Not for a historical map, but maybe for some fantasy scandinavian centered map that maybe I can make for my own joy. Maybe other people also like do their own scandinavian maps and they look in this thread for inspiration.
If we cant have other suggestions in this thread, then it is solved by starting a second (more open) thread about Scandinavia.
edit: (Atleast I think its unreasonable to only have one thread if some opinions arent allowed)
Last edited:
Sven_vegas said:I know you started this thread, and I like to respect the thread, but may I suggest that you dont continue to look at all suggestions as if they were directed only for you.
I think deallus first suggestion was intresting. Not for a historical map, but maybe for some fantasy scandinavian centered map that maybe I can make for my own joy. Maybe other people also like do their own scandinavian maps and they look in this thread for inspiration.
If we cant have other suggestions in this thread, then it is solved by starting a second (more open) thread about Scandinavia.
I didn't mean to make it sound as if I consider this thread exclusively mine or anything.
But it was started with the intention of getting the area improved for a new ordinary EU2 map - not for some fantasy map centered around Scandinavia.
Everyone are free to suggest provinces for me or others in this thread, but I just wish people would generally try to be a bit more objective about the whole thing. Wherever they might be from, their nation is *not* the worldcenter of the EU2 map. People must try to be a bit more realistic about this whole thing, and see the big picture as whole.
If I add 3 new provinces to Iceland, it would be 3 province IDs wasted. It would add nothing at all to the game, other than some joy for people who want to play a fantasy Iceland scenario.
If I add a whole bunch of new provinces to Norway (who should be rather weak ingame, as that's what they were), I'd have to add lots of new provinces to Sweden and Denmark as well.
If I do that, I'll have to add lots of new provinces to North Germany, the Baltic and Russia as well.
...and if all those regions get more provinces, I'd have to add more provinces to Norway again - right?
It's a circle... where will it end?
Should have seen that one coming. Damned swedes..
What historical significance has Finnmark? And what about Bergenhus and Østlandet? I think we could do with two norwegian provinces, Trøndelag (since Trøndelag was swedish for a brief period) and Norway. Forgive me for being sarcastic.
Some of this doesn't suit the description of a map. It seems more accurate with a rough sketch, or even a childs drawing. But I guess that's just me being nationalistic and biased (whatever that means).
What historical significance has Finnmark? And what about Bergenhus and Østlandet? I think we could do with two norwegian provinces, Trøndelag (since Trøndelag was swedish for a brief period) and Norway. Forgive me for being sarcastic.
deallus said:
While I do most often approve of some good old cursing at the Swedes; it's not quite fair in this instance, since I'm a Dane...
You are doing the exact same thing as the Polish Horde did when MKJ refused to implement a 40-province Poland... "If I can't have it my way, you might as well just make it 1-2 provinces, you evil <insert nation here>-hating person!"
Dude, your last Norway mape have 15(!) provinces. That's more than England. That's more than Netherlands and Portugal combined. Can you give me *any* good reason why this is needed for Norway, other than the fact that it might look better?
deallus... you seem to have photoshop... why not make your own map? Anyway, I think you should read some French posts in this thread: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=185983&page=1&pp=25 and you will see how a request should be done
That's not a bit better, you guys oppressed us for 400 years. I think I'm entitled to some joking about beer-bellys, red hotdogs and linguistic disorders.Hive said:While I do most often approve of some good old cursing at the Swedes; it's not quite fair in this instance, since I'm a Dane...
OK, that was childish. I just tried to show that the "historical significance"-card is dangerous to play, it may backfire. Some awful people may question the historical significance of all those Australian provinces, and even Fyn.Hive said:
That last map was never meant seriously, it was just for fun, and for showing Birger what will happen if we make provinces out of everything like Öland.Hive said:
Oh, trivia: Modern day Norway (the five EU provinces Østlandet, Bergenhus, Trondheim, Narvik and Finnmark) has an area of 307.860 square km. Portugal and Netherlands combined has only 125.784 square km. That's two and a half time more than Portugal and Netherlands combined
(NOT SERIOUS ALERT) To be serious for a change, I think we can afford splitting southern Norway (Bergenhus and Østlandet) in four.Yeah, sure I've got PhotoShop, but I don't know how to make those maps. Any trick to it?
deallus said:Oh, trivia: Modern day Norway (the five EU provinces Østlandet, Bergenhus, Trondheim, Narvik and Finnmark) has an area of 307.860 square km. Portugal and Netherlands combined has only 125.784 square km. That's two and a half time more than Portugal and Netherlands combined
Yeah, sure I've got PhotoShop, but I don't know how to make those maps. Any trick to it?
Let's keep the thing going
modern day Finland is 338,000 square km. Finland want's to have 1 more province than Norway. Modern day Finland also has more inhabitants than Norway - one province more please. But if we look things other way round.
EU2 timeframe Finland had most of the time population of 300,000 to 700,000 - concentrated on minimal land area. Why would we need to model something like this with 10+ provinces?
deallus said:OK, that was childish. I just tried to show that the "historical significance"-card is dangerous to play, it may backfire. Some awful people may question the historical significance of all those Australian provinces, and even Fyn.
I'm gonna remove some Australian provinces again - but at least you can't accuse me of being nationalistic because of my Australia...
Regarding Denmark, I'm adding two provinces and removing 1. That's 1 additional province for a nation I think most people will agree underperforms in EU2.
Oh, trivia: Modern day Norway (the five EU provinces Østlandet, Bergenhus, Trondheim, Narvik and Finnmark) has an area of 307.860 square km. Portugal and Netherlands combined has only 125.784 square km. That's two and a half time more than Portugal and Netherlands combined
Again: square km means very little; population means more. Try to compare the population for Norway in 1419 with those of Netherlands and Portugal.
It's not my harder than doing flags and shields - but you'll have to wait for Inferis' map tools to be released.
OK, no more mr. Nice guy. Either you read what I write or don't bother taking part in the discussion at all.Ges said:Let's keep the thing going
But if we look things other way round.
EU2 timeframe Finland had most of the time population of 300,000 to 700,000 - concentrated on minimal land area. Why would we need to model something like this with 10+ provinces?
Even though I wrote "NOT SERIOUS ALERT" someone took this seriously. Nice going.Hive said:
I give up.. You guys keep the freaking norwegian map the way it is..